Freedom (review)

BOOK REVIEWS Freedom. By William Safire. (Garden City, New York: Doubleday & Co., 1987. Pp. xxi, 1125. $24.95.) Safire's volume, covering the first two years of the Civil War, is not just another war novel. It is a work that will command respect ofhistorians who will also enjoy it. The book contains a bibliography ofsome 3 1 8 books and articles that were consulted by the author or that dealt with the novel's subject matter. And, most interesting for historians, Safire included an "Underbook," 134 pages long, in which he discussed his sources and offered a rationale for the views advanced in the work. These notes and comments in the "Underbook" are worthy of the historian's attention. The main characters in the story (which takes place mostly in Washington ), are John C. Breckinridge, Stanton, McClellan, Chase, Lincoln, and Anna Ella Carroll, member of the famous Maryland Carroll family. During the war she wrote several pamphlets supporting the Lincoln administration . Safire accepted her postwar statements that she deserved credit for the move of Union armies up the Tennessee River in 1862, although he was aware that historians had never regarded her claims as meritorious. Apparently , Safire did not consult the writings on this subject of Kenneth P. Williams, Carroll's chief critic. Williams's argument might have altered Safire's presentation of Miss Carroll's charges. In the case of McClellan, Safire supported the view that Little Mac's military strategy was sound and that Lincoln's interference with McCIeIlan 's plan was detrimental to the war effort. Safire argued in his notes that to Civil War historians, beginning with Nicolay and Hay, Lincoln was always the hero, and a villain was needed to explain why the war went so poorly for so long. Historians found in McClellan the perfect protagonist and thus denigrated his ability as a military strategist. Lincoln is Safire's main character. The Lincoln ofthis novel is a wartime president who put the "fervor ofthe Declaration ofIndependence ahead of the compromises of the Constitution." This commander-in-chief sought a general "willing to take and inflict heavy casualties to save the Union." But this Lincoln also had his imperfections. He had once asked Thurlow Weed 74CIVIL WAR HISTORY to raise $ 1 5,000 from private sources. Safire suggested that this money may have been used, not for the public good, but to pay for debts amassed by Mrs. Lincoln. The author noted that back in 1860 Lincoln deposited $500 to his own bank account the day after Weed visited him in Springfield. Safire criticized historians for not probing these two actions which might have involved Lincoln in some shady deals. Concerning emancipation, Safire's Lincoln knew that he "could fool some ofthe people some ofthe time."As Safire saw it, Lincoln deliberately held out to worried Northern whites his "mirage called colonization" to get them to accept his plan to free slaves under Confederate control. He supported the colonization scheme although he was well aware that it could never become a reality. In brief, Safire's Lincoln was devious even as he was heroic. Civil War historians will enjoy reading this novel, and ifthey refer to the notes in the "Underbook,"they may find in it some challenges to long held views. Joseph George, Jr. Villanova University Southern Emancipator: Moncure Conway, The American Years, 18321865 . By John d'Entremont. (New York and Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1987. Pp. xiv, 282. $29.95.) The pre-Civil War South was a land of contrasts, and few Southerners personified that better than Moncure Conway. To the manor born, he repudiated the manorial tradition; seeped in patriarchal ideals, he championed the emancipation of slaves and the equality ofwomen. John d'Entremont tackles the formidable task of explaining this Southern anomaly. He divides the study into three parts, each containingthree chapters. The first explores two foundations for Conway's abolitionism: the positive influence of warm, compassionate women (especially his mother and two of his aunts), and the negative influence of his cold, authoritarian father. Conway sought independence, both from his father's domination and the arrogance of Southern aristocrats. He quit the law for the ministry, then (largely under the...